DURING THE GULF WAR, members of the press complained to the Pentagon that they were
kept too much in the dark about military plans and operations. They cited World War II
for contrast, when, it was claimed, members of the press often accompanied American
units even into dangerous situations. "That was different," explained one U.S.
commander. "You were on our side then."

Is that too harsh an assessment?

Not really. Mike Wallace once said he would not inform an American military unit about
an enemy ambush -- a tactic his profession has polished to a high art. He is journalist
first, American second, apparently. The Gulf War crimped journalism's anti-military
style for a time because against its wishes and its coverage, the American people
supported the war and made heroes of its generals. (If the war had gone on for
months or years, or featured heavy casualties, opinion might have shifted, but that's
another matter.)

Arnett

So poor Peter Arnett, unable to persuade the world that Americans were purposely
bombing Iraqi women and children and wantonly destroying baby-formula factories, has
gone back to Vietnam hoping for the big payoff. In a brassily hyped joint CNN/Time
magazine project called "Valley of Death," Arnett and reporter April Oliver have put
their names and reputations (as have their employers CNN and Time) behind an
obvious skein of lies about a 1970 American operation in Laos that involved the use of
deadly Sarin nerve gas.

According to CNN and Time, American special-operations forces were sent into the
jungle to seek out American defectors and kill them. To effect their mission, they were
assigned gas masks and Sarin gas, which they used against North Vietnamese forces.

If any of this were true, it would be fair and right for these respected news
organizations to track down the story. But as Eric Felten in The Weekly Standard and
Chip Beck in Soldier of Fortune, among others, have abundantly demonstrated, it is
false, and what's more, the reporters almost certainly knew it to be false.

Who are the sources? CNN and Time rely most heavily on one Robert Van Buskirk, a
lieutenant who led one of three platoons on the Tailwind mission. In 1983, Van Buskirk
wrote a book about his experiences in Laos, but the account in the book differs
dramatically from the one CNN/Time presented. In the book, Tailwind was merely a
diversionary mission to distract attention from a CIA-planned mission about 30 miles
away, and the gas deployed was tear gas, not Sarin nerve gas. In fact, it was not until
he was interviewed by Arnett and Oliver that Van Buskirk suddenly retrieved his
"suppressed memories" of nerve gas and American defectors. The book was never
mentioned in the CNN broadcast.

The highest-ranking military officer supposedly to offer confirmation of the nerve gas
story was retired Adm. Thomas Moorer. Arnett claims that Moorer confirmed the use
of nerve gas in Thailand "off camera." But Moorer later denied this. Besides, as Eric
Felten reported, Moorer is 87 years old, lives in a nursing home and gets confused.

Eugene McCarley, the Army captain who led Operation Tailwind, told The Weekly
Standard that he denied the use of Sarin a thousand times in interviews with Oliver.
CNN never broadcast McCarley's denials, only a segment of tape in which McCarley
said that poison gas "might have been available." How dishonest can you get?

How about ignoring the fact that Sarin doesn't even cause the symptoms described by
Van Buskirk? He described enemy soldiers vomiting and choking, yet recovering quickly
enough to shoot holes in his departing helicopter. Those are symptoms of tear-gas
inhalation, not Sarin exposure. A scientist who explained all this to Oliver also talked to
The Weekly Standard. He said he had explained that these symptoms were
inconsistent with Sarin exposure and that Oliver had gotten angry at him.

Now that Air Force Maj. Gen. Perry Smith has resigned as military adviser to CNN, and
Adm. Moorer, Capt. McCarley and the pilot who supposedly delivered the gas have all
vehemently denied CNN/Time's account, Arnett and Oliver are claiming that their true
source is a secret document they will not reveal.

If a conservative magazine had published such scurrilous lies, the scandal would be
scarcely containable. It should work the same way with
CNN/Time.

6/22/98: Clinton: inventing his own reality?6/16/98: Senator mom? 6/12/98: Wisconsin: a trail blazer? 6/9/98: These girls say no to sex, yes to excellence
6/5/98: Lewinsky's ex-lawyer would feel right at home as Springer guest6/2/98: English? Si; Republican? No! 5/29/98: The truth about women and work5/27/98: Romance in the '90s 5/25/98:Taxing smokers for fun and profit5/19/98: China's friend in the White House
5/15/98: Look out feminists: here comes the true backlash
5/12/98: The war process?
5/8/98: Where's daddy?
5/5/98: The joys of boys
5/1/98: Republicans move on education reform
4/28/98: Reagan was right 4/24/98: The key to Pol Pot 4/21/98: The patriot's channel 4/19/98: Child-care day can't replace mom4/15/98: Tax time4/10/98: Armey states obvious, gets clobbered4/7/98: A nation complacent?4/1/98: Bill Clinton's African adventure3/27/98: Understanding Arkansas3/24/98: Jerry Springer's America3/20/98: A small step for persecuted minorities3/17/98: Skeletons in every closet?3/13/98: Clinton's idea of a fine judge3/10/98: Better than nothing?3/6/98: Of fingernails and freedom3/3/98: Read JWR! :0)2/27/98: Dumb and Dumber2/24/98: Reagan reduced poverty more than Clinton2/20/98: Rally Round the United Nations?2/17/98: In Denial2/13/98: Reconsidering Theism2/10/98: Waiting for the facts?2/8/98: Cat got the GOP's tongue?2/2/98: Does America care about immorality?1/30/98: How to judge Clinton's denials1/27/98: What If It's Just the Sex?1/23/98: Bill Clinton, Acting Guilty1/20/98: Arafat and the Holocaust Museum1/16/98: Child Care or Feminist Agenda?1/13/98: What We Really Think of Abortion1/9/98: The Dead Era of Budget Deficits Rises Again?1/6/98: "Understandable" Murder and Child Custody1/2/98: Majoring in Sex12/30/97: The Spirit of Kwanzaa12/26/97: Food fights (Games children play)12/23/97: Does Clinton's race panel listen to facts?12/19/97: Welcome to the Judgeocracy, where the law school elite overrules majority rule12/16/97: Do America's Jews support Netanyahu?